Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

[Guest]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

No, the fee is always payable - that's never been disputed. The bailiff has every right to charge the fee, but he has no right to demand it from the council if you pay them direct. He can only recover the fee from the debtor - the debtor is the only one who is charged the fee.

However, he cannot use the original warrant for his fees only. The liability order was for the debt and the council costs only.

You seem to be unable to understand the concept of the debt being passed to the bailiff for enforcement. Any payment made will belong to the bailiff once he is in possession of the debt, the fact that the authority is paid is irrelevant, the sum paid will just come off the balance and they will sort it out which ever way they feel they must, but it makes no difference to the debtor.

The sum due under the liability order is added to the fees due (dependent upon the enforcement stage reached). This is all in the boring legislation which you seem unwilling to read. This total(fees+ order ) makes the "amount outstanding" and it is this total which is paid by the proceeds, there is no separation it is one total amount which is due.

[Wombats]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

I'm actually of the opinion that a bailiff, like any other tradesman, is entitled to charge a fair fee for a fair job, but also feel their role in society is archaic. The current fees are in no way fair for the work done - £75 for sending a letter, £235 for knocking on your door. Simply not justified. There are cheaper and more productive ways of collecting these debts.

Yes, that is an entirely different discussion and I agree with you. It has always been the case that Further Steps Notice provides for various ways of collecting the debt, the most efficient of which is an AOE or deduction from benefits. There is little room for corruption then either, but of course many would not want to their employers to know. The over-simplistic answer is avoid this by paying in the first place. However, we all know, even if the government appear not to, that life's twists and turns stop you being able to do that sometimes.

There are very few 'won't pays' and far more 'can't pays'. The simplification of the fee structure has helped enormously as we see through all the forums, but the fees are what they are. We can think them fair or unfair, but it doesn't change them.

[Wombats]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

You seem to be unable to understand the concept of the debt being passed to the bailiff for enforcement. Any payment made will belong to the bailiff once he is in possession of the debt, the fact that the authority is paid is irrelevant, the sum paid will just come off the balance and they will sort it out which ever way they feel they must, but it makes no difference to the debtor.

The sum due under the liability order is added to the fees due (dependent upon the enforcement stage reached). This is all in the boring legislation which you seem unwilling to read. This total(fees+ order ) makes the "amount outstanding" and it is this total which is paid by the proceeds, there is no separation it is one total amount which is due.

Spot on - as per post 28 for a 'real life' example of this.

[Guest]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

I'm inclined to agree that no matter what is written there will always be two groups, one which believes fees are payable and one which believes they're not. I suspect all the debate and argument in the world would not resolve this.

f

Yes unfortunately the bailiffs and the authorities are in the group which says the fees and orders must both be paid whoever the debtor hands his money over to.

[doubleslap2]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

You seem to be unable to understand the concept of the debt being passed to the bailiff for enforcement. Any payment made will belong to the bailiff once he is in possession of the debt, the fact that the authority is paid is irrelevant, the sum paid will just come off the balance and they will sort it out which ever way they feel they must, but it makes no difference to the debtor.

The sum due under the liability order is added to the fees due (dependent upon the enforcement stage reached). This is all in the boring legislation which you seem unwilling to read. This total(fees+ order ) makes the "amount outstanding" and it is this total which is paid by the proceeds, there is no separation it is one total amount which is due.

:tinysmile_aha_t: The debt never 'belongs' to the bailiff - they have zero interest in the debt, just their fees. The debt (and the bailiff's actions) remain the responsibility of the council at all times.

It seems the original point has been lost - there has still been no answer to show where in any legislation it says that the council are legally bound to pass on to the bailiff any money the debtor has paid directly to them.

[Wombats]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

No, the debt to the council is still only £75 - that is what you owe the council. You owe the other £75 to the bailiff. As I said, that document is about what happens if the baillif does not manage to recover the full debt including his fee. It has nothing to do with what happens if you pay the council direct.

No, the document states, "if the proceeds of enforcement are less than the amount outstanding ......." Proceeds include money paid to the bailiff, the council, by Uncle John and Mum and Dad. ALL these proceeds go towards the TOTAL debt owing at that stage which is being enforced, and so all are part of the enforcement process.

[doubleslap2]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

Yes unfortunately the bailiffs and the authorities are in the group which says the fees and orders must both be paid whoever the debtor hands his money over to.

The bailiffs I can understand, but the authorities have blindly accepted what the bailiff's tell them, rather than what the legislation actually says.

[Wombats]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

:tinysmile_aha_t: The debt never 'belongs' to the bailiff - they have zero interest in the debt, just their fees. The debt (and the bailiff's actions) remain the responsibility of the council at all times.

It seems the original point has been lost - there has still been no answer to show where in any legislation it says that the council are legally bound to pass on to the bailiff any money the debtor has paid directly to them.

Pedant!!!!

You know he meant once the debt was passed to the bailiff for enforcement, so the bailiff 'has possession' of the debt in that sense. :tinysmile_twink_t2:

[doubleslap2]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

No, the document states, "if the proceeds of enforcement are less than the amount outstanding ......." Proceeds include money paid to the bailiff, the council, by Uncle John and Mum and Dad. ALL these proceeds go towards the TOTAL debt owing at that stage which is being enforced, and so all are part of the enforcement process.

Proceeds are only those collected by the bailiff. Look at this example:

A man in hospital is aware that he is behind on his CT. He is in hospital for an extended period. During that time a LO is obtained and a bailiff appointed, who visits his home (no-one in obviously). The man is unaware of any of this, but not wanting his CT to go unpaid asks a friend to pay it online for him, which the friend does, paying the amount as shown (which would not show any bailiff fees).

Would you argue that the money paid has been done so because of enforcement?

[Wombats]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

Proceeds are only those collected by the bailiff. Look at this example:

A man in hospital is aware that he is behind on his CT. He is in hospital for an extended period. During that time a LO is obtained and a bailiff appointed, who visits his home (no-one in obviously). The man is unaware of any of this, but not wanting his CT to go unpaid asks a friend to pay it online for him, which the friend does, paying the amount as shown (which would not show any bailiff fees).

Would you argue that the money paid has been done so because of enforcement?

I would argue the money paid has been paid as part of the enforcement process. I would also expect a friend or family member to contact the council to avoid the LO by explaining the circumstances.

(45 minutes out for me - some TV watching to do!) :beagle:

[doubleslap2]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

I would argue the money paid has been paid as part of the enforcement process. I would also expect a friend or family member to contact the council to avoid the LO by explaining the circumstances.

(45 minutes out for me - some TV watching to do!) :beagle:

Ok, after the soaps, perhaps you would answer the question rather than sidestep it with glib comments.

[MissFM]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

I doubt that anyone on here would disagree with the outrage that "Bailiffs" exist in this enlightened age. It's (presumably) obvious to all that some form of AOE or AOB would be a less cruel/medieval solution - but less costly? I doubt it, levels of bureaucracy being what they are.

It seems blindingly obvious that the £75 is not "just for sending a letter" , nor is the £235 "just for knocking on the door" (again, overheads and levels of bureaucracy produce huge on-costs).

Additionally, IMVHO the structure also has a deterrent intent ie an incentive for "debtors" to engage as soon as they become aware that they are in difficulties as regards meeting their financial obligations.
I'm not, btw, saying I agree with the ethos of any of it (in fact it makes me want to spit) - but I do thank Andy :wub: for spelling out how it works in practice and the law behind it, which does seem unequivocal to a thicko such as myself.

[Guest]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

The point of the thread was to make everyone aware that paying the council directly does not absolve them from paying the fee to the bailiff. This is illustrated in the regulations and is as clear as day, and even if it wasnt it would not matter because this is the way that the authority and the bailiffs see the situation, so we are stuck with it.

So advising anyone to pay the council and forget the fee is in effect going to cost them at least £235 when the bailiff calls. T

[Kati]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

I doubt that anyone on here would disagree with the outrage that "Bailiffs" exist in this enlightened age. It's (presumably) obvious to all that some form of AOE or AOB would be a less cruel/medieval solution - but less costly? I doubt it, levels of bureaucracy being what they are.

It seems blindingly obvious that the £75 is not "just for sending a letter" , nor is the £235 "just for knocking on the door" (again, overheads and levels of bureaucracy produce huge on-costs).

Additionally, IMVHO the structure also has a deterrent intent ie an incentive for "debtors" to engage as soon as they become aware that they are in difficulties as regards meeting their financial obligations.
I'm not, btw, saying I agree with the ethos of any of it (in fact it makes me want to spit) - but I do thank Andy :wub: for spelling out how it works in practice and the law behind it, which does seem unequivocal to a thicko such as myself.

so true x
(you're not a thicko either xx)

[Guest]

Re: Bailiff £75 Compliance fee, do I have to pay it?

Proceeds are only those collected by the bailiff. Look at this example:

A man in hospital is aware that he is behind on his CT. He is in hospital for an extended period. During that time a LO is obtained and a bailiff appointed, who visits his home (no-one in obviously). The man is unaware of any of this, but not wanting his CT to go unpaid asks a friend to pay it online for him, which the friend does, paying the amount as shown (which would not show any bailiff fees).

Would you argue that the money paid has been done so because of enforcement?

As said you only need to read the regs the definition is there, i went to the trouble of putting it in post two for you and included a step by step explanation, it really is not that complicated. Proceeds is defined down to the last detail within the regulations, and is the amount raised by the sale of goods and the exercise of the powers of the bailiff, the bailiff powers is defined as any enforcement as described by regulations)sic) the regulations describes the enforcement process for council tax as being in three stages the compliance(letter) stage being the first. There is nothing about who receives what money, nor need there be, it is owed to the bailiff if you pay the council they will tell the bailiff to knock it off the amount due and you will be liable for the rest, this is the situation like it or not.